easygroupflights

Email a flight offer

egf_send_flight_offer

Emails a prepared flight offer to the traveller as a formal offer they can accept. Takes only the confirmation_token from preparing it, and sends a real email.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional. Any unique string for this request, such as a UUID. Calling again with the same key and the same arguments returns the first result instead of sending again. Kept for 24 hours.
`confirmation_token`	Yes	confirmation_token returned when this write was prepared. Valid for 15 minutes.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`email`	Yes	Where the offer went.
`reply`	Yes	The fare service's own confirmation.
`status`	Yes
`offer_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed9 schema fields changedOct 1, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / adults

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Adults on the offer. Defaults to 1.",
-  "minimum": 1,
-  "type": "integer"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / children

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Children on the offer.",
-  "minimum": 0,
-  "type": "integer"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / confirmation_token

Added value: +{
+  "description": "confirmation_token returned when this write was prepared. Valid for 15 minutes.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / email

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Where to send the offer.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / infants

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Lap infants on the offer.",
-  "minimum": 0,
-  "type": "integer"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / message

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "A sentence or two of context for the traveller, e.g. why this option was chosen.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / name

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Traveller's name, used to address the email.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / offer_id

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "offer_id of the chosen fare, exactly as the flight search returned it.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "offer_id",
-  "email"
-]New value: +[
+  "confirmation_token"
+]

AddedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds the crucial real-world effect that it 'sends a real email' to an external party and produces an actionable 'formal offer they can accept', which an agent needs to know is not a dry run. It does not discuss failure modes, but that is largely handled by the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with no filler; the purpose and the 'real email' warning are front-loaded, and the workflow dependency follows immediately.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the schema covers token expiry and idempotency. What remains is a prerequisite and the fact a real external email is dispatched, both of which are stated; only edge-case failure behavior is absent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%: both confirmation_token (with its 15-minute validity) and idempotency_key (with its retry semantics) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds only that the token comes from the preparation step, which is a marginal gain over the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb+resource ('Emails a prepared flight offer to the traveller') that clearly distinguishes it from the sibling egf_prepare_flight_offer by the word 'prepared' and the explicit dependency on the token from preparation. An agent can tell the send step apart from the prepare step without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The line 'Takes only the confirmation_token from preparing it' establishes the prerequisite (egf_prepare_flight_offer must run first) and the sequencing. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it or naming alternatives outright, so it is clear context rather than explicit routing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All easygroupflights tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.